libphobos on ARM

[Johannes Pfau]

Am Wed, 13 Jun 2012 17:24:18 +0100
schrieb Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw at ubuntu.com>:


> 
> I can check this, but the side of the issue when I checked some time
> ago I saw was that the initialiser is a typeless constructor that is
> raw casted into the type we are assigning it to, so one bad factor of
> that is we are relying on the member layout to match what was created
> by toDt.

So DECL_INITIAL would do a type check? That would detect size
mismatches of course and is probably a good idea.

> 
> > 2 seems like it probably wouldn't be ABI compatible to dmd. I don't
> > care if we break ABI compatibility, just wanted to mention that.
> >
> >
> 
> 2 is more for better debug information for a class and interface
> declaration's inheritance tree.  Ever notice that you can't access
> methods through the debugger, lest you want to ICE gdb? :-)
> 
> There's a little bit of cludge and cleanup needed around that code
> area anyway, so it's on my TODO.

I haven't looked at GCCs inheritance implementation for C++ yet, maybe
it's even possible to stay ABI compatible to dmd? Would be good to keep
at least ClassInfo (as declared in druntime) consistent.